The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1887-08-10
Ths EecTstary oiths Treasury Issues sn In
pcTtaLt Cncular-Iatersst on Bonds.
a Relic of Indian observation-disclosures
Eliminated for the Department of
Justice-Other Washington
News.
Special to the Sentinel.

out one opinion with regard 20 the gulIt or
innocence of the presiding judge. He has
been partiZan from the beginning, and bis
chaTge-Just received here to-day-is the
sum of all judicial outrage. Many persons
say that whatever may have been the con-
duct OF the defendants last November, it
has been more than condoned by the con-
duct of the judge on the bench, who, for
getting his position, turned his court into
an Office for the prosecution such as will
make the skeleton hsgers of Jeffries in his
coffin rustic together for Joy.
To say nothing of the fact at this time
that since Indiana was admitted into the
Union has psrtiZansbip been never so
wsntonly promulgated from the bench,
it is to be noted, that q all the trials in
Indisna's capital, the opponents of De-
mocrscy who have been indicted IN the
Federal Court for crimes growing out OF
political ohenses are lew. L recall now but
one. There may have been more.
1t is well known in indianapolis that
since 1859, when Col Drake was counted
out for Auditor there has not been sn hon.
est election when Republicans had the OPP
portunity to be dishonest. In 1861 when
the ballot boxes were taken to the jsil and
Democratic tickets taken out and Republi-
can tickets substituted for them, and in
1854, when Massachusetts soldiers amused
themselves by knocking down Democrats
and voting early and often themselves and
encouraging minors, sons OF prominent
citizens, to DO the same, Republicans had
their own way and no Court was ready to
make them afraid. Sammy Beck was
counted out tor Treasurer, John Fishback
was counted out for MaVor, Dan Lemon
counted cut, other Democrats counted out
scores of times, and no Federal Judge
Taked Grand Jury for not returning in
dicimeDts.
am not abiding to these bygone out
RACES TO excuse the conduct CT any wrong
deer, but with such q record of crime re-
ptatsd year after year; is it any wonder,
when Republican Judges stand Idly by
view them with calm, pass them over with
out action, that in case like the one jdst
cleared, that people awaken TO the fact
that in the United States Supreme Court
there is punishment for only one clase of
ofenses against the purity of the ballot
box, and to that class belong Democrats?
Republicans go scot free" in common
parlaHce; the Jail, stripes, ignominy and
disgrace for Democrats alone.
When such unfaIrness is exhibited fed
eTal judges need not be surprised if the
people refuse to listen to their partizan
haIaHeuts, and jurors refuse to return
verdiets in answer to partizan Jury speeches
from the bench.
Judge Woods is lawyer, presumed to
be good one, and no one knows better
livered in the conspiracy trials, had he
been setting as g trial Judge in the
Marion Criminal Court, would not have
stood long enough on appeal to the Su.
preme Court of our State, &c be knocked
down. He would mo-, for his own judicial
reputation, have dared to deliver such q
charge, and he knows that fact as well as
anyone can know it. Had there been an
appeal IN the case lust tried, the judicial
inc No hove led h-~e -.
a speech, for it was not a charge but a
speech for the prosecution as able and
strong as any made. Why he chose to
blast his reputation for fairness he can best
answer for himself. He knows, or ought
to know, that when Judge ceases to be a
Judge and becomes public prosecut
his il fiueDce for good is gone; unfort
ately bis influence for evil remains. w
people once know that no party ak
the orc 10 which the Judge belongs
have fair treatment In his Court
respect due to his position is forfeite
he has no one to blame but himself.
To take such an unfair advantage
position because there is no appeal is
cowaEdly and tyrannical.
Such conduct merits contempt, nay,
more, 1t merits impeachment.
In all0diBg to the partisan aspect of the
case, and speaking OF tie effect OF a con-
viction should Sullivan be found guilty,
Judge Woods makes the lowest partisan
appeal to the Democrats on the jury, and
says:
81 think there is evidence enough before
this jury as TO the control of affairs at the
court house to enable you TO know that
there Is Board Of Democratic Commits
sioneTs over there and If Sullivan loses his
Office it would go into Democratic hands.
But that Is not q proper consideration for
rs one way or the other If Mr., Sullivan
ha her n hold fo r,f4f <ae~.J
1t does not necessarily follow that be shall
lose his Office even II he is guilty.
Read that gam and think of it, citizen
of indiana What is il but plea to the
Democrats in the jury to join with their
Republican brethren and find verdict oil
guilty. because they will thereby surrender
no partisan advantage? What is il bat an
implied promise that If they will find Sui
lIvan guilty The takes it for granted Re
publicans will so fnd), he will see that
they lose nothing, but mply infiict fine
as he did upon Perkins, without imprison
ment. He says: The punishments pre-
scrlbed by the statute, under which this
prosecution is based, are within the con
troll OF the court within certain limita
tons" The question will naturally arise
If the jury and himself had nothing to dc
with the partisan aspect of the case, why
1t was necessary to allude TO ii and tell the
Jurors that Democrats would come to nc
harm In Marion County as Democrats by 8
verdict OF guilty. 1t will not do; he car
not escape the net he has spread. He did
not spread Ii for himself, but, nevertheless
he is caught in 1t.
In effect Judge Woods charge is this
Gentlemen, Democrats of the Jury, you
need have no fears OF losing the clerks
Office in Marion Comfy If you find John
Sullivan guilty. You have the County
Commissioners and If / conclude to send
him to the penitentiary you can have an
other Democrat in bis place; and am not
sure any how that / will send him north.
may conclnde, Democratic Jurors, to LEI
him of with fine as 1 did Perkins, in
that event no harm is done to your party
organization"
Can partisanship sink lower Is IL DOS
sible Tor judge to make laser appeal to
the partisan instincts of men who are sol.
emmy sworn to try case according to the
law and the testimony The crimes oil
the accused become Insignificant in view
OF such spectacle.
In modern political trials is it possible
to find an appeal so low as this ?
Think Of such an appeal falling from
the lips of Mclean, Davis, Huntington
David Mcdonald, White and Gresham,